Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has declared emphatically during his recent state of the nation address on February 22, 2023,that Ukraine will not be admitted to NATO. Rather, he asserted, Ukraine will resurface as a buffer zone between the US-led military bloc and Russia once the protracted conflict reaches its conclusion. These remarks reflect Hungary's long-standing opposition to Western military support for Kyiv and underline its preference for dialogue with Moscow.
Since the intensification of hostilities in Ukraine beginning February 2022, Budapest has consistently criticized the European Union's arms deliveries to Kyiv. Orbán firmly believes these measures only serve to prolong the conflict, echoing his calls for the lifting of sanctions on Russia. He contends these punitive actions have inflicted more harm on Europe than they have on Moscow itself. "The conflict, which is on its way to its end, is about bringing the territory called Ukraine, which until then was a buffer zone, a buffer state between NATO and Russia, under NATO control," Orbán stated.
Echoing this sentiment, he contended, "Ukraine, or what remains of it, will once again be a buffer zone. It will not be a NATO member." His comments prompted a reconsideration of Western strategies. He questioned the rationale behind attempts by European and American liberals to integrate Ukraine within NATO, highlighting the impracticality of expecting Russia to idly accept NATO’s expansion right up to its borders. "Why European and American liberals thought the Russians would stand idly by is still a mystery," he remarked, asserting this “experiment has failed”
Beyond NATO, Orbán’s vision casts doubt on Ukraine’s potential EU membership. He emphasized the necessity of Hungary's approval before Kyiv can gain entry to the bloc, hinting strongly at Budapest's readiness to obstruct Ukraine's accession if it conflicts with national interests. "Admitting Kyiv to the EU will hinge on Budapest’s acquiescence," he insisted, affirming Hungary's influential position within the EU’s decision-making framework.
This stance not only highlights Orbán's criticism of EU leadership but also reveals his broader perspective on the overarching mismanagement of the Ukraine crisis by European leaders. Earlier, he postulated how these leaders are "living in a self-created bubble, refusing to acknowledge this war cannot be won as they envision.” He maintained, "Ukraine’s defeat is not just possible but increasingly likely,” aligning with his government’s skepticism about the West's capabilities to fulfill its aspirations concerning Ukraine.
Critically, Orbán pinpointed responsibility for the conflict on the previous US presidency under Joe Biden, accusing the administration of exacerbation of tensions with Moscow. He welcomed Donald Trump's political resurgence, sharing expectations for collective peace initiatives and stating, "We thought the Democrat administration would fall…and a Republican government led by Donald Trump would take over, brokering peace and boosting the economy.”
Throughout his recent remarks, the Hungarian Prime Minister continually reinforces Hungary’s socioeconomic predicament due to the war, stating, "So far, Hungary has lost some 6.5-7 billion euros due to the war.” Nonetheless, he remains optimistic about recovery: "I am counting on a fantastic year,” he mentioned, pointing to Hungary’s 21-point economic program and emphasizing plans aiming for economic neutrality and promoting peace.
The future of Ukraine remains uncertain as its aspirations for NATO and EU membership face mounting challenges from geopolitical realities and internal divisions within the West. Orbán's prediction of Ukraine transitioning to serve primarily as a buffer state carries significant ramifications for its sovereignty, security, and aspirations on the international stage.
Historically, countries relegated to buffer state status often find themselves vulnerable to external influences and struggle to maintain independent foreign policies— characteristics which, if applied to Ukraine, may hinder the nation’s rebuilding efforts and assertiveness within the global arena.
Considering the longer-term repercussions, Orbán's position raises significant questions about the future security architecture of Europe. If Ukraine finds itself outside of NATO, the perceived vulnerabilities among the Eastern flank of the alliance could embolden Russia’s influence across neighboring territories, thereby undermining NATO’s credibility around collective defense commitments.
Hungary’s unique approach contrasts sharply with its EU and NATO colleagues, many of whom have provided extensive military and financial aid to Kyiv. Budapest's insistence on dialogue with Russia and criticism of sanctions reveals its pragmatic stance, deeply rooted within the realities of its reliance on Russian energy sources and economic ties with Moscow.
Orbán's position serves as both a critique of Western policies and as an affirmation of Hungary's national interests. By opposing Ukraine’s NATO and EU membership, he aims to steer Hungary clear of entanglement in conflict-ridden territories, maintaining its strategic autonomy within the shifting global order. Through these actions, Orbán has positioned Hungary as the singular dissenting voice within the EU and NATO, insisting upon pragmatic responses to the continuing conflict.